Bangalore District Court
State By J.P.Nagar vs Accused Has Appeared Before Court In on 2 November, 2022
KABC030400042019
IN THE COURT OF THE I ADDL.CMM: BENGALURU
Dated this the 2nd day of November 2022
Present: Shri Anand T Chavan, B.Com., LL.B(Spl.).
I Addl. C.M.M BENGALURU.
JUDGMENT U/s. 355 Cr.P.C.,
Case No. : C.C.No.12447/2019
Date of Offence : 10-05-2016 to 07-11-2016
Name of complainant : State by J.P.Nagar
Police Station, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Sr. APP)
Name of accused : Shreyas Reddy
S/o Ashok Reddy,
aged 23 years,
R/o No.1107, 35th D cross,
28th main, Jayangar 4th T Block,
Bengaluru
(By Shri H.V.Praveen Gowda
Advocate)
Offences complained off: U/s. 341, 354, 384, 504,
506, 509 of IPC & 67(B) of
I.T. Act.
C.C.No.12447/2019
2
Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
Final Order : Accused is acquitted
Date of Order : 02-11-2022
JUDGMENT
Inspector of Police, J.P.Nagar P.S has filed charge sheet against accused for offences punishable under Sections 341, 354, 384, 504, 506, 509 of IPC and u/s 67(B) of Information Technology Act.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case are that:-
One Kumari Pola Kavya is sister of C.W.1. Said Pola Kavya was studying B.Com., in Jain college, 9 th block, Jayanagar. At that time accused got introduced himself to her and though she was not liking him, he used to often call her to mobile phone. Further he used to threatened her saying that he has got some of her obscene and nude pictures and he was threatening her to buy him a mobile phone and to give him some money. Further C.C.No.12447/2019 3 when Pola Kavya was expressing her inability to fulfill his demands, accused used to come near house of C.W.1 and abused her in filthy language. Further despite advice by C.W.2 and 3 as to not to trouble C.W.1 and Pola Kavya, in the month of June 2016 at about 6.30 p.m. accused came to their house situated at Flat No.310, 3 rd floor, Poorna Palace, 2 nd main, 3 rd Stage, J.P.Nagar and kicked the door with force. Further he threatened C.W.2 to send Pola Kavya outside and he pulled her out side the house. Further he took her to a passage in front of their house and outraged her modesty by naming her body parts in obscene manner. Thereafter on 7-11-2016 at 10-30 a.m. accused called up to mobile phone of C.Ws.1 and 2 and asked them to come out of their house within 5 minutes. Further he threatened them to upload nude photos of Pola Kavya in face book and in group of Pola family , if they don't come out of the house.
C.C.No.12447/2019 4 When C.W.2 did not heed to his request, accused went to third floor of their house and he damaged CCTV cable. Further he again kicked the door of their house and abused them in filthy language. He wrongfully restrained C.W.2 and threatened them with dire consequences. Further he demanded money from them in the alternative and it was revealed that accused with the help of his Samsung duos mobile phone had taken obscene photograph of Pola Kavya without her notice. Thereafter accused tried to extort money from her by blackmailing to upload such photos to social media. Thereafter, on 10-11-2016 C.W.1 lodged first information before J.P. Nagar police, which was registered by them in their PS Cr.No.603/2016 and FIR is issued. After recording statements of material witnesses, after collecting print outs of mobile screen shots and after conclusion of investigation, I.O. has filed charge sheet against accused for above offences.
C.C.No.12447/2019 5
3. The accused was arrested during crime stage and he is enlarged on bail. After filing of this charge sheet against accused, cognizance of alleged offences are taken and summons is issued to accused. Accused has appeared before court in pursuant to summons. Copy of charge sheet is furnished to accused u/s 207 of Cr.P.C and charge is framed against accused. Accused has not pleaded guilt of alleged offences and he has claimed to be tried.
4. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined 1 witness as P.W.1 and got marked 9 documents as per Exs.P1 to P9. M.O.1 and 2 are identified. Statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. is recorded and accused has denied incriminating evidence against him. Accused has not led any defence evidence.
C.C.No.12447/2019 6
5. On the basis of charge sheet allegation, the following points arose for consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 341 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 354 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 384 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 504 of IPC?
5. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 506 of IPC?
6. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence C.C.No.12447/2019 7 punishable under section 509 of IPC?
7. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubts that accused has committed offence punishable under section 67(B) of Information Technology Act?
8. What order ?
6. Heard arguments. Perused oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution.
7. The following are findings to above points.
Point No.1 to 7 : In the Negative Point No.8 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS
8. Point No.1 to 7 : These points taken together for considerateness to avoid repetition of facts and evidence. In support of its case, prosecution has got examined C.W.14 I.O as P.W.1.
9. P.W.1 Sanjeev Kumar Mahajan S/o Jangu Mahajan has testified in his evidence that on 10.11.2016 while as PI in JP Nagar PS, Bengaluru at C.C.No.12447/2019 8 10.30 pm, CW1 appeared to said police station and lodged written First Information. He received the same and registered the same in their PS Cr.No.603/2016 and issued FIR. He has identified First Information lodged by CW1 as per Ex.P1, FIR as per Ex.P2 and his signatures on said documents as per Ex.P1(a) and Ex.P2(a). He has further stated that on 11.11.2016 he has conducted spot mahazar in presence of C.W.1, her father and panchas. He has further identified the said mahazar as per Ex.P3 and his signature on it as per Ex.P3(a). P.W.1 has further stated that on 11.11.2016, C.Ws.10 and 11 have produced accused before him. He has complied arrest formalities of accused and recorded statement of said official. Further on same day he has recorded voluntarily statement of accused as per Ex.P4 and thereafter accused produced Samsung mobile SMJ700 before him, which was used by him for alleged crime. P.W.1 has further stated that he has seized Samsung mobile under mahazar in C.C.No.12447/2019 9 presence of C.Ws.5 and 8 panchas, he has identified the said mahazar as per Ex.P5 and his signature on it as per Ex.P5(a). He has further stated that he has reported the seizure of said mobile phone as per PF No.382/16 and he has identified the same as per Ex.P6 and his signature on it as per Ex.P6(a). He has further stated that on same day he has recorded statements of CWs.1 to 6 and 8. He has further testified that on 12.11.2016, CW1 has produced Apple Mobile - A1429PCC, he has produced true copy of said mahazar and PF, thereafter he recorded statements of C.Ws.7 and 9. He has also identified original electricity bills of place of offence and Tax Invoice copy of mobile phone used by accused, which was in the name of his sister. He has identified the said electricity bill as per Ex.P7, copy of invoice marked as per Ex.P8. P.W.1 has further testified that on 28.11.2016 he has issued requisition to DCP South seeking call detail records of mobiles numbers 9972163083 and 7406508056.
C.C.No.12447/2019 10 He has further idetified said requisition as per Ex.P9 and his signature on it as per Ex.P9(a). Thereafter, he has received reply of said requisition through E-mail and he has produced copy of call details of accused in page no.21. Thereafter, he has handed over further investigation of the case to CW15. Further he has identified SAMSUNG mobile phone of accused as per MO-1, APPLE phone of CW1 as per MO-2. In cross-examination by defence side P.W.1 admits that the victim Pola Kavya is own sister of C.W.1 but he denies that accused and C.W.1 were loving each other. He has further admitted that he has not recorded statement of victim and he had no difficulty to do so. Most importantly he has admitted that C.W.1 and victim Pola Kavya were not present at the spot on the date of incident. The entire evidence of this witness is denied by defence side and it is suggested to him that he is deposing falsely though he has not investigated the case.
C.C.No.12447/2019 11
10. Further C.W.1 first informant, C.Ws.2 and 3, who are parents of first informant are not secured and examined to prove alleged incident and alleged act of accused in blackmailing on extorting money from victim Pola Kavya. Further eye witness i.e., C.W.4 and witnesses of mahazar i.e., C.W.5 to 9 are also not secured and examined to prove seizure of mobile phones of accused and C.W.1 as per case of prosecution. C.W.10 and 11 officials who said to have arrested the accused are also not secured and the official who had forwarded the mobile phone for examination is also not secured. The other I.O. C.W.15 has also not stepped into witness box. Hence the aforesaid evidence of sole I.O. /P.W.1 does not help prosecution in any manner to bring home the guilt of accused. None of independent witnesses are examined to prove alleged act of accused on alleged date of incidents. Most importantly the so called print outs of screen C.C.No.12447/2019 12 shots of mobile do not help prosecution in any manner in the absence of concerned certificate u/s 65(B) of Indian Evidence Act. Further though I.O. has produced call related documents issued by Nodal officer/DCP, nothing is explained as to how same are helpful to prove the nexus between accused and alleged crime. Further the expert who said to have examined the mobile hand sets and submitted report is also not secured and examined to prove the alleged act of accused. Hence, there is nothing on record to show that accused has committed alleged offences as per case of prosecution. Moreover, the ingredients of Sec.67(B) of Information Technology Act are not attracted to facts and circumstances of the case. Hence in view of above reasons, the evidence of prosecution witness has not inspired the confidence of the Court with regard to alleged guilt of accused and as such it is incumbent upon this Court to hold that the C.C.No.12447/2019 13 prosecution has failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that accused has committed offences punishable under Section 341, 354, 384, 504, 506, 509 of IPC and u/s 67(B) of Information Technology Act. Hence, Point No.1 to 7 are answered in Negative.
11. Point No.8: -
For the reasons stated and findings given on point No.1 to 7, following is:
ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 341, 354, 384, 504, 506, 509 of IPC and u/s 67(B) of Information Technology Act.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
M.O.1 & 2 seized mobile phones shall be returned to concerned owners after expiry of appeal period. I.O. shall format C.C.No.12447/2019 14 objectionable materials in such mobile phones prior to such release.
(Typed by me directly on computer, revised, corrected by me and then pronounced in open court on this the 2 nd day of November 2022).
(Anand T Chavan) st 1 Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for prosecution :-
P.W.1, Sanjeev Kumar Mahajan;
List of exhibits marked for prosecution :-
Ex.P1, First information,
Ex.P1(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P2, FIR,
Ex.P2(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P3, Spot mahazar,
Ex.P3(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P4, Voluntary statement of accused,
Ex.P4(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P5, Mahazar,
Ex.P5(a), Signature of P.W.1,
Ex.P6, PF No.382/2016,
Ex.P7, Electricity Bill,
Ex.P8, Copy of invoice,
Ex.P9, Requisition,
Ex.P9(a), Signature of P.W.1;
List of material object :
M.O.1, Samsung mobile phone,
M.O.2, Apple phone of C.W.1;
C.C.No.12447/2019
15
List of witnesses examined for defence:- NIL List of documents marked for defence:- NIL 1st Addl. CMM., Bengaluru.
(Judgment pronounced in the Open Court vide separate judgment) C.C.No.12447/2019 16 ORDER Acting under Section 248(1) of Cr.P.C. the accused is acquitted for the offences punishable under Section 341, 354, 384, 504, 506, 509 of IPC and u/s 67(B) of Information Technology Act.
The bail bond and surety bond executed by accused shall continue for a period of two months from the date of this order and thereafter same shall stand canceled automatically.
M.O.1 & 2 seized mobile phones shall be returned to concerned owners after expiry of appeal period. I.O. shall format objectionable materials in such mobile phones prior to such release.
I ACMM, Bengaluru.